昨天帶的課程單元是“企業社會責任”，我一直在思考如何讓這個單元的教學可以啟發學生、也有一定的實用價值。
於是我設計了這樣的教學流程：先透過「企業應擔負社會責任嗎？」進行正反方辯論，再來談企業社會責任怎麼定義、評估、與其隱含的西方價值觀。
談定義、評估時，我提供學生一個非常簡單的企業社會責任評估表，可以很快地理解企業在產品、社區關係、投資人關係、員工關係四個面向應有的社會責任。接著才帶回到這次課程準備的個案“Vigeo與企業社會責任”，了解Vigeo設計企業社會責任評估方法的邏輯以及重點。這幾年企業社會責任的驅動力量之一是來自於“負責任的投資”，Vigeo這個案例優秀之處在於展示了企業社會責任評估方式的多元面向，與影響投資人投資意向、企業採取改善行動的作法。當然，我也提醒學生一件事：「西方的企業社會責任隱含的價值觀，在推廣至全球時面對的各種挑戰。」
下半段課程，我再繼續收攏討論，談數位化衍生新的企業社會責任，以及企業社會責任的履行為什麼需要更好的數位基礎建設。這幾年許多學者發表了獨特學術研究見解，支持了這段課程的設計。
最後，落地到非常實用的企業社會責任議題：碳排放。
應該說，過去節能減碳是企業的社會責任，可做可不做，現在，節能減碳目前逐漸進入各國法規，那就是要做以及要做得多好。我並沒有試著推銷單一價值觀，而是挑戰大家對於“地球暖化是否是人為造成？”的觀點。畢竟，不買單「地球暖化是人為造成」，對於碳盤查、碳足跡、碳權交易、碳邊境稅等議題，都會覺得一切都只是商業炒作。我寧可讓學生帶著疑惑去找資料研讀以建立「地球暖化與人類使用石化燃料」的個人觀點，而不是硬推銷主流觀點，因為這才是真正的內化學習。
如果可以接受了「地球暖化、人類使用石化燃料、溫室氣體」之間的推論，那麼，學生就會理解碳盤查的“組織排放邊界”與識別“間接排放源項目”到底是怎麼回事。也能夠了解為什麼這些“與碳同行”的過程中，數位基礎建設是必要的。
每次上這樣的單元課程真的是耗盡心力，上完後，耗盡體力。然而，也感恩有這樣的單元課程，才能把觀念到實作完整呈現。
Multifaceted Exploration of Corporate Social Responsibility: From Theory to Practice
Yesterday, the course unit I led was "Corporate Social Responsibility" (CSR), and I've been pondering how to make the teaching of this unit inspire students while also holding practical value.
Thus, I designed the following teaching process: First, I initiated a debate on "Should corporations bear social responsibility?" to discuss both pros and cons. Then we talked about how CSR is defined, evaluated, and its underlying Western values.
When discussing definition and evaluation, I provided the students with a simple CSR assessment table that quickly allows an understanding of a corporation's social responsibilities in four aspects: products, community relations, investor relations, and employee relations. Next, I brought the conversation back to the case prepared for this course, "Vigeo and Corporate Social Responsibility," to understand the logic and key points behind Vigeo's CSR evaluation methods.
One of the driving forces behind CSR in recent years has been "responsible investment," and what makes the Vigeo case excellent is how it demonstrates the diverse aspects of CSR evaluation, influencing investor intentions and encouraging corporate improvement actions. Of course, I also reminded students of one thing: "The challenges faced when promoting the Western values implied in CSR on a global scale."
In the latter part of the course, I continued to consolidate the discussion, talking about the new CSR arising from digitalization and why the fulfillment of CSR requires better digital infrastructure. Many scholars have published unique academic insights in recent years, which supported the design of this part of the course.
Lastly, we landed on a very practical CSR topic: carbon emissions. It could be said that in the past, energy saving and carbon reduction were corporate social responsibilities that were optional, but now, they are gradually becoming mandated by various national laws; it's not just about doing it, but how well it's done. I didn't try to sell a single value but challenged everyone's viewpoint on "Is global warming man-made?" After all, if you don't buy into "global warming is man-made," then subjects like carbon accounting, carbon footprint, carbon trading, and carbon border tax would all seem like mere commercial hype. I'd rather have students research with skepticism to build their personal opinions on "global warming and human use of fossil fuels" rather than forcibly sell mainstream views, as this is true internalized learning.
If students can accept the inference between "global warming, human use of fossil fuels, and greenhouse gases," then they will understand what "organizational emission boundaries" and identifying "indirect emission sources" are all about. They will also understand why digital infrastructure is necessary in these "carbon-related" processes.
Teaching such a unit course truly exhausts me both mentally and physically. However, I'm also grateful for these unit courses that allow me to present concepts and practices comprehensively.
